Search questions

• Question by: Nicky Gavron
• Meeting date: 01 July 2015

Nicky Gavron AM: Thank you very much. I just wanted to make one point. It would be extremely helpful in forwarding this issue if the LEP and Assembly Members could really look carefully at the amended London Plan. I argued on behalf of the Planning Committee that we should have symmetrical high-speed broadband as the new utility delivered to all new developments. There was a lot of querying of me about ‘symmetrical’. I am not a technological whizz, but I explained that it was about having the same speed of uploading as downloading, which is obviously an issue. Moreover, we...

• Question by: Kit Malthouse
• Meeting date: 01 July 2015

Kit Malthouse AM MP: I assume that you would accept that for all the businesses and people employed in the area of green technology and green industries, 80% of what they do and what holds them back is exactly the same as for businesses that are not involved in those technologies. Therefore, your work on small business, science and technology and all those areas of emphasis would be equally as applicable to green technology, Jenny ‑‑ Jenny Jones AM: Yes. Kit Malthouse AM MP: ‑‑ as they are to other things. Harvey McGrath (Deputy Chair, London Enterprise Panel): Indeed. Kit...

• Question by: James Cleverly
• Meeting date: 01 July 2015

James Cleverly AM MP: Thank you, Madam Chair. Prompted by Mr Knight, you mentioned more corporate involvement in the housing market and the provision of housing specifically for employees. Across the country, there are some significant examples where business owners have taken a very direct role in the provision of housing. I am thinking of Port Sunlight, Bournville, etc, where those - for want of a better word - early corporate entities recognised that they had a vested interest in the provision of good quality, local housing for the people working in their businesses. You mentioned the utilisation of pension...

• Reference: 2009/0118-1
• Question by: Andrew Boff
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

In the light of Jacques Rogge's statement that the Olympic Route Network is not essential, will the ODA reconsider imposing the ORN on Londoners?

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Mr Armitt, let us just get this straight. You approved Mr Higgins' package which is £641,000 a year, but your own package is £250,000. That is part time isn't it?

• Question by: Navin Shah
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Can you confirm that you have sufficient contingency funding and that will cover any slippage or any delays in programme or additional costs and that, therefore, there will be no requirement for building from the public purse or any other source?

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Thank you, Chair. I would have thought one of the greatest risks that you actually run is the security of the site during build and, indeed, during the Games itself. Are you content that the structure, where you have got Ian Johnson now heading security, I assume within the Park? I am not sure if he has got responsibility for all the 134 sites plus the free to view Games. You have got him there. You have got the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) through Chris Allison [Assistant Commissioner, Central Operations, Metropolitan Police Service] and the public order with the responsibility...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Hopefully it creates one or two hostages to fortune and helps to raise the expectations on your performance even higher. My other question is about legacy. I do not want to steal Dee Doocey's question but it is this; it seems to me one of the biggest areas of risk is things that do not really have a proper parent so issues of legacy, such as what happens with the Stadium afterwards. If you are going for your mythical gong at the end of the Olympics it does not really matter to you what happens to the Stadium afterwards, particularly...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

It sees a bit old fashioned to rely on the road network when we are putting in this fantastic public transport option. They cannot all be carrying gold medals! They cannot all need protection. Why can you not just say to the IOC that, actually, it is much more efficient to go by public transport, and not pollute east London further?

• Question by: Victoria Borwick
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

A couple of quick questions if I may. Could you just confirm that the vehicles operating on the Olympic Route Network will all be disability compliant? The next question is perhaps you could update us on the blue light services and what planning you will make to make sure that they adjust their route planning models because we know there is a limited amount of time and they need to get themselves organised? The final question is when would you reveal which of the ORN roads have exclusive Olympic lanes?